On handling WJBELL

On handling WJBELL

Post by Darre » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 07:51:50



Since Warren has me killfiled, he doesn't see my posts .. so everyone
else can just ignore him .. I'll respond to all his posts .. He'll think
no one is replying to his posts .. I'll make sure lurkers see that he's
an idiot WinTroll .. and eventually he'll just go away ..
 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by Terry Port » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 08:38:25


Darren went insane and wrote the following
on his bedroom wall with an old crayon:

Quote:>Since Warren has me killfiled, he doesn't see my posts .. so everyone
>else can just ignore him .. I'll respond to all his posts .. He'll think
>no one is replying to his posts .. I'll make sure lurkers see that he's
>an idiot WinTroll .. and eventually he'll just go away ..

Sadly dolts like Bell aren't too bright and think that *everyone*
hangs of each letter they type, in breathless anticipation of the
next gem of wisdom coming their way.

Bell is copping it from *all* the Linux advocates here Darren, so
dont think you're alone :)

Terry
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux. Debian 2.2 kernel 2.2.20  
Free Micro burner: http://w3w.arafuraconnect.com.au/~tp/burn.html          
** Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **

 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by wjbel » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 17:09:25



> Darren went insane and wrote the following
> on his bedroom wall with an old crayon:

> >Since Warren has me killfiled, he doesn't see my posts .. so everyone
> >else can just ignore him .. I'll respond to all his posts .. He'll think
> >no one is replying to his posts .. I'll make sure lurkers see that he's
> >an idiot WinTroll .. and eventually he'll just go away ..

> Sadly dolts like Bell aren't too bright and think that *everyone*
> hangs of each letter they type, in breathless anticipation of the
> next gem of wisdom coming their way.

> Bell is copping it from *all* the Linux advocates here Darren, so
> dont think you're alone :)

Fortunatly, any newcommers here will see the linonut flawed logic and
think for themselves:

http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=23985

 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by Paul Cook » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 17:29:33


you still haven't provided us with the message reference for your
message giving test results...

You are going to get hammered on this point right round the clock...

--
I tried to come up with an original signature, I failed, so this is what
you're getting instead

 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by wjbel » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 18:07:54



> you still haven't provided us with the message reference for your
> message giving test results...

> You are going to get hammered on this point right round the clock...

You mean to tell me you're too stupid to find a simple message on
google?  Geez, I thought you linscrews where suppose to be the best at
searching though pages and pages of documentation, you get plenty of
practice with linux.

No, I won't do your work for you.

 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by Paul Cook » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 18:26:59



>No, I won't do your work for you.

you can't because it doesn't exist.

Paul Cooke
--
I tried to come up with an original signature, I failed, so this is what
you're getting instead

 
 
 

On handling WJBELL

Post by wjbel » Wed, 06 Feb 2002 19:36:13




> >No, I won't do your work for you.

> you can't because it doesn't exist.

Yes, it does, I found it myself in one simple search.
 
 
 

1. Q: Handling large mail loads....how to distribute mail handling??

I've been dealing with relatively reasonable mail loads on an AIX 4.3.2
7025-f50 (3 155MHz processors) machine running sendmail V8.8....2800
users
and a 2GB /var/spool/mail.  But the days of clean and simple ASCII text
mail are passing and the direct and indirect consequences can be
substantial.  
1) Someone puts a "pretty" graphic in an annoucement email and sends
that 250K file to 1000 users...now I have a 250MB lump in the mail
system.  And that's "legitimate"...
2) A few days ago, I had a clueless user attach a 4MB scanned image (the
text amounted to about 12K....the scanned image including dust specks
was 4MB) file to an email and send it to 1000 users on the mail
machine.  My mailbox filesystem went from 2GB to 6GB...that'sn
unjustifiable....but it happened.  Well, I've been pleasantly surprised
with how nicely the work got distributed over time instead of blocking
everything solid.  
3) The worst load on the mail server lately was a two day degradation of
our T1 line into random noise.  By the time things were finally set to
rights the queued mail in /var/spool/mqueue was substantial and the F50
(usually at 20-30%) was running flat out for 30 minutes to clear it out.

All this is clearly a portent: "richer" mail (video clips, anyone?) and
heavier loads to come....point-and-click mail makes users dangerous!
So......the question: How does one handle really *substantial* loads.
Yes, a hotter machine and hotter NIC card...but that only goes so far.
How do you distribute mail load over more than one machine?  How do you
deal with mail service distributed over multiple machines, file systems
and NICs?

---

// as for the rest: wife,house,children, cars, music, garden....

2. Intel EtherExpress ???

3. HMMM, wjbell

4. Help me my Make doesn't work properly!!!!

5. Wjbell's Anti-Linux Lies -- 5/7/2002

6. Ghost Linux

7. Hey WJBell

8. xdm broken after power failure

9. Linux fscked up wjbell's system.

10. wjbell is all about stolen code

11. Your Thought on WjBell the FreeBsD Guru <Snicker Chuckle>

12. the real wjbell?

13. wjbell...KDE